Nikon USA: Capture the Savings Discount

Not only is 80cm inconveniently short

I'm sure Nikon make an overprised extension cable...:-)

Companies need profits to stay in business, produce new innovations and meet our needs. Retailers, be they Brick and Mortar or internet, require profit margins as well. We consumers buy things we want - if the price is too high, we can't or don't buy, in that case, the price is lowered or the manufacturer goes out of business. There are other photography firms that make Nikon look reasonable - price of a single camera / lens would pay for several Nikon lenses and a high end body. Just bought the Nikon 200-500 - with rebate and retailer incentive on top, a real bargain.

Just bought the Nikon 200-500 - with rebate and retailer incentive on top, a real bargain.

Congrats on the new 200-500mm/f5.6. To me, that lens at the full $1400 price point is a real bargain. I was a bit surprised that Nikon USA finally discounted it by $200 during the 2017 holiday season, and then they repeated that in 2018. Currently it is merely 10% or $140 off, but it is still an excellent deal.

Yes, I should probably look into a Camranger (or similar). The WT-7A just offends me as a massively overpriced way to provide its functionality, as you say the implementation isn't exactly streamlined, and can't have added much cost to the camera just to integrate properly - like the WR-R10, which just shouldn't have to dangle outside the body, and shouldn't have to take up the 10-pin socket if you're using it as a flash trigger.

 

I think the issue is the metal body of the camera, which is why most Nikon wifi implementations require an add-on accessory, except for the Z6 and Z7. Snapbridge doesn't - but then it is really slow and many people find it unreliable. The Z6 and Z7 can provide a proper wifi connection to transfer images that is much faster than Snapbridge and this works without an accessory. I would guess that a similar implementation eventually finds its way to Nikon DSLRs as well.

 

I suspect Nikon are aware of the criticism towards the WR-R10+WR-A10 and its potential fragility. I am sure they are working on an alternative solution to triggering flashes by radio. But there will always be an accessory to get it to work reliably they need to get the antenna out of the faraday cage.

 

Speaking of which, if we're talking overpriced... the MC-30A wired remote release.

 

I have used the original MC-30 which has the drawback that it goes stiff in extreme cold and potentially could shake the body in that frozen state; currently use the MC-30A which doesn't get stiff and is more usable in the winter. I have used various third party ones at work, some of them are truly awful (it works the first time it is tried, but after you jam it in a pocket of a camera bag, it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't) and some of them have worked ok, the one I recommend was made by Hähnel and included cords for all the Nikon terminals (so one remote can be used to trigger any Nikon DSLR), that one didn't turn out to be so fragile. But I want to emphasize here that when you go with the cheapest accessories, you run the risk that you get something that is truly awful, and there is a bit more research and trial and error involved in getting something that works reliably in the long run. For those who value their time, the MC-30A by Nikon may be a better ticket simply because you avoid the trial and error and associated waste of time and frustration.

Re. being a Faraday cage, I don't think the camera body is entirely free of holes. There's the big one at the front, for a start, and there's the now-unused space on top of the prism which could be used if you need a turret. I do appreciate that the Z series have stepped things up a bit, and that getting decent wireless behaviour takes a bit of work (although being worse than an Eye-Fi card is impressive); whether it really required something like the WT-7A when Camranger et al. have shown something at least somewhat less clunky and cheaper (and hardware-wise it really doesn't need much). As someone who uses the remote trigger, the wireless flash solution is particularly unimpressive - hence my Godox purchase.

 

As for the MC-30... I don't mind paying a premium for an on-brand solution (hence my 70-200), but there's only so much engineering that should go into a two-stage microswitch and 80cm of copper cabling. Certainly being more expensive than a wireless trigger is just ridiculous. Pushing people to third-party solutions which then may be under-engineered does Nikon no favours.

the wireless flash solution is particularly unimpressive - hence my Godox purchase.

 

Could you explain that a bit? In what way is it significantly better than Nikon's solution, apart from supporting likely a larger set of flashes? I find the Nikon solution very impressive in that I haven't seen a single instance it didn't fire correctly.

 

The cabling has to be implemented in such a way that it can withstand a lot of twisting and abuse. Some manufacturers make cable releases that cannot withstand twisting.

the wireless flash solution is particularly unimpressive - hence my Godox purchase.

 

Could you explain that a bit? In what way is it significantly better than Nikon's solution, apart from supporting likely a larger set of flashes? I find the Nikon solution very impressive in that I haven't seen a single instance it didn't fire correctly.

 

Specifically in the context of "someone who uses the remote trigger" - I believe to trigger wirelessly in Nikon's SB5000-capable radio system, you need the WR-R10. Of itself that's an interesting bit of kit, but as a mandatory item, the only way to connect it to my D850 (or D810) is via a WR-A10, and that occupies the 10-pin socket - so I can no longer use the cable release. Okay, I could use a WR-T10, but that doesn't help if I'm doing anything interesting on the trigger end; the Godox sits in the hotshoe, on the other hand. Of course, while I'm not a fan of the WR-A10/WR-R10 dongle in terms of fragility, I don't claim a Godox in the hotshoe is any better.

 

The cabling has to be implemented in such a way that it can withstand a lot of twisting and abuse. Some manufacturers make cable releases that cannot withstand twisting.

 

I concede that it's possible to do it wrong - in the way that it's possible to make a USB cable wrong, or put dual-link DVI pins on both ends of a cable without bothering to connect them in between, or indeed (as I've just discovered) make a phone case that covers the laser focus system. I'd be nervous about a version that cost $2. But does it really cost £99 to make such a thing? It's got, I believe, three wires to connect; you could use a mains power cable...

It should be possible to trigger the camera using other devices apart from the WR-T10, there is the WR-1, for example. Also, I suspect that if you make a two-tailed "T" cable and mount the WR-A10+R10 to one 10-pin terminal, and your chosen remote cord using another (just connecting the wires together), it might allow you to use them simultaneously, though I haven't tried this. It may or may not work.

I feel we've veered off-topic, even if I mention that the WR-1 is £550! Hacking a squid cable together has some merit; maybe there's a market opportunity.

 

To be honest, it's not that critical to me - I don't do that much flash shooting, and the dynamic range of the recent Nikon bodies (allowing "digital fill flash") is part of the reason for that. It just bugs me as a part of the system that feels under-engineered and over-priced, and it rankles a little that I had to spend money and cupboard space to get back to where I was with the D810; I could have achieved this with an on-camera optical trigger (SB-800 or SU-800, say) but if I was going to spend money standing still, I may as well have taken a step forward, which I hope the radio triggers are. Meanwhile, I can wait for a camranger-ii (if the company hasn't Osborned themselves).

 

(Edit: Checking my memory... the SB-5000 can't act as a radio trigger, is that correct? So if you go Nikon radio flash you have to lose the 10-pin connector?)

Edited May 2, 2019 by Andrew Garrard

So if you go Nikon radio flash you have to lose the 10-pin connector?

 

Yes, for the time being at least. I can't think of any situation where I'd not be able to do what I need to do with it though. If I trigger a camera remotely, I can do that either by using the WR-T10 or by mounting WR-R10's on both the master and remote cameras so I can shoot with the main camera and then it triggers the secondary camera if I set it to do so, at the same time. The flashes go off if set to do so, again at the same time. For triggering the camera on a timer, I can just use the intervalometer in the camera itself. The camera can also be triggered using the USB interface (via computer, or third party accessory).

I was vaguely thinking about break-the-beam and audio triggers, or anything I might do with my arduino that I've got hooked to a 10-pin connector. I might play with a Y-cable if it ever comes up, though.

I'd be nervous about a version that cost $2. But does it really cost £99 to make such a thing? It's got, I believe, three wires to connect; you could use a mains power cable...

 

The MC-30A cord is very flexible yet doesn't seem to break, no matter what I do to it. Of course it doesn't cost £99 to make it - that's not how pricing works. When you have a low-cost accessory, the transportation, storage costs and the person behind the counter that will show it to you and sell it cost significant money. And Nikon have to make profit somewhere, quite often manufacturers choose to put it in the accessories.

Oh, and I've always been happy to buy accessories at high street stores in the belief that they get some money from mark-up. I'd live with even £30 for it, which is the kind of ball park companies like Belkin over-charge you for an HDMI cable (don't get me started on their - I think it was Belkin's - optical audio cable with gold-plated contacts). But £100 for a two-position microswitch? The official 10-pin-to-banana-plug cable was preposterous when I last looked, too - when I wanted one I ended up buying a third-party trigger adaptor and cutting it in half.

I was vaguely thinking about break-the-beam and audio triggers, or anything I might do with my arduino that I've got hooked to a 10-pin connector. I might play with a Y-cable if it ever comes up, though.

 

For this application, I would then use the USB port to trigger the camera, if the Y-cable contraption doesn't work.

 

I've got this feeling that there was a time when the camera could be triggered also via the flash shoe, but I don't know if that would still be possible.

 

But anyway, since you have third-party flash triggers, you don't really need to worry about this stuff.

I have zero interest in the Sigma 105mm/f1.4. I don't need a tripod collar on that lens and its weight just doesn't make sense.

 

However, personally, I probably won't buy any more F-mount lenses, including the 105mm/f1.4. I tend to keep my lenses for many years to come and for the longer run, the Z mount is the future.

 

I feel the same way about buying any more F mount lenses. The Z mount is definitely the future. I have my D810 and a few lenses, and those are going to have to hold me over for a long time.

Oh, meant to say: apart from being cheaper, the 105mm Sigma does have one aspect that appeals to me, presumably by dint of being enormous: by f/2 it has effectively no mechanical vignetting (the bokeh is almost perfectly circular at f/2, whereas it has "swirly" cut-offs even at f/2.8 on the Nikkor. For a lens bought for its bokeh, this appeals to me. The LoCA seems less intrusive on the Sigma, too (though I can't really tell whether it'll be better than the recent problem I had with LoCA on the 85mm Art). I'm not entirely sure about the rendering in the transition region, but that concern may be outweighed by the others, for me. So while I can understand some people dismissing the Sigma as too big for what it is, it's still on my list of desirables, more so than the Nikkor. (So is the 40mm.)

I simply cannot stomach the idea of the size and weight of the recent Sigma normal and tele primes. I want the shooting to be a reasonably pleasing and ergonomic experience where possible, and the total weight of my bag is very much affected by the weight of individual lenses. However, if you are happy using the Nikon 200/2, then the Sigma 105/1.4 may be appealing. I do think the 105mm f/1.4 Nikkor has too much of a cat's eyes effect at times but it has many advantages and I end up using it a lot despite this effect.

 

I don't especially like shooting with an EVF (though Nikon's Z6/7 EVF is not as bad as some) and especially after I got new eyeglasses, I can't believe how detailed the image of the D850 OVF is, and how pleasing it is to look through at the subject without pixels, jaggies, flickering, exposure variations, rolling shutter and the other "lovely" things that the EVF adds.

So is the 40mm

B&H had a "hot deal" on the Sigma 40mm a few days ago - and I was tempted for a few seconds until I remembered the 1.2kg weight of that beast.

Sigma Art lenses seem to use the weight-implies-quality design philosophy, such that people won’t dismiss them as “toy like” plastic lenses. I have the 35mm/f1.4 Art, and it is an excellent lens optically, but I certainly don’t need the weight.

Weight does make for a slight reduction in vibration - I first noticed when I got a 135mm f/2 DC (which isn't huge but is quite dense). Otherwise, I'm perfectly happy with lighter equipment as well, I just happen to prioritise it below performance - or at least, since it's always a trade-off, I suspect I'm more willing than average to use heavy glass. It's probably a "percentage of body mass" thing. That means Sigma should like my philosophy, but I accept that neck-ache, especially for those who hike a lot, isn't fun, and they may have other priorities. I don't think Sigma are particularly prone to making the lenses heavier just to make them feel "higher quality" - they do seem to have some optical benefits from the extra size, although whether you feel it's worth the cost is entirely personal.

 

I briefly got excited about the Sigma deal at B&H, but a) saw it a little late, and b) am not sure it's worth it once you factor in shipping to the UK. If I get the 40mm it's going to involve a 35mm/50mm trade-in anyway, so I'd need to negotiate. I'd really prefer a 50mm refresh that behaves as well as the 40mm seems to, in terms of focal length convenience - I prefer the 35/50/85 set to a 40mm/85mm pair (and I'm still torn on the 135mm f/1.8 vs 105mm f/1.4 for similar reasons), though I remind myself that I already have three different 50mm f/1.8 lenses (four if you count Canon) if I really need a 50mm. Good thing I also have some zooms...

After more import hassle than seemed necessary (the courier 'lost' the first one), my Sigma 40mm has arrived as replacement for my Art 35 and 50mm pairing.

 

What a beast! It balances pretty well on my D850 and in a close tie with the 135mm Art, is my sharpest lens yet. I've never had a lens where you can zoom in to 200% in DxO* and it's still sharp. You do indeed get to see the pixels before it gets soft but that is under severe pixel peeping! I don't think a star would record as a single pixel, but I'll try it out...;)

 

Wide open the DoF is VERY narrow indeed.

 

It is a slightly odd focal length, but I think that's more my past usage with an Art 24-35 f2 zoom, an Art 35 and 50mm prime, rather than anything else.

 

I managed to get mine for £740 in the end.

 

*Sadly DxO doesn't have a correction module for the Sigma 40mm yet. Hopefully coming soon!

Edited May 13, 2019 by mike_halliwell

Just a friendly reminder that a lot of these deals are ending on June 1, a bit more than a week away.

Apparently Nikon USA has extended the discounts. Many of them were set to expire on June 1, but most of them are extended to June 29, 2019. However, some expire earlier. Please check Nikon's site:

 

http://www.nikonusa.com/capturesavings/Capture-Savings-Instant-Savings-Promotion.pdf